Was it that cancer didn’t exist until they came into contact with westerners or was it that the methods of diagnosing cancer didn’t exist until they came into contact with westerners?
Life is a terminal illness.
The former i’d say… studies have been done on it and white folk have been examining them medically since the 19th century… Their diet is omega3 rich, much like the Japs, but the Japs eat a lot of plants too and live to a right good age where the Inuits have shorter lifes than other societies.
Probably due to all the cancer they get from their animal protein rich diet, kid.
I’d probably put it down to the hardship of their lifestyle, mate.
Eating food kills you. Body generates free radicals in process of turning food into energy. Not eating food will also kill you but faster.
Breathing air also produces free radicals. Breathing air kills you. Not breathing air kills you but faster.
Free radicals damage DNA of cells - cause of heart disease and cancers.
Experiments with mice show if you restrict calories dramatically then life can be extended dramatically all other things being equal. You might still die early though and you will have been hungry most of your life.
[quote=“glasagusban, post: 912066, member: 1533”]Animal protein rich diets may be as harmful to health as smoking 20 a day.
[/quote]
I read that article as well. Sensationalist horseshit. There’s no way a claim like that could be made or even suggested based on an observational study. More scaremongering from the press in the hope of generating a few page views.
If we accept other studies that identify things that cause increased risk of cancer, why not this one?
@Horsebox you’ll find the article in the Irish times and a few other papers today.
I’d say all the lads here who exist on protein shakes in the gym are bricking it.
I’ve got wifi signals bouncing off my head,my glass of water is full of flouride, the chicken on my plate is laced with antibiotics, the fibres chaffing my inner thighs dangerously synthetic and the fucking ozone layer is thinning over my head.
Still on top of the world.
1 Like
[quote=“glasagusban, post: 912180, member: 1533”]If we accept other studies that identify things that cause increased risk of cancer, why not this one?
[/quote]
There are different types of studies. This one hasn’t controlled for any of the vast array of factors which may skew the results, or proposed any type of causal mechanism which might explain the observed effect. Never mind actually test that mechanism in a controlled study and explain how it causes cancer. Studies like this one are supposed to point to future interesting directions for research, they’re not providing proof of anything.
In fairness, reports are saying the study “suggests”. It goes along with the established links to cancer of too much red meat or processed meats though.
I read the headline and that was enough- this argument has been banging on for years and they will never get to the bottom of it focusing on food types alone- One of the leading proponents of it and a staunch vegan, Linda McCartney, died of cancer… It’s what is going into foods, directly or indirectly, that needs studying- genetics can not be ignored also- As with Linda, a chap (We will call him Tassoti) could live on take aways, beer and drugs and live until 90- the health freak could contract cancer at 40 and die. I can;t see how these fucks can claim doing more of x will lead to cancer unless they test all the other variables first.
Use of percentages is also misleading - explained to me by a doctor once in quite a clear way when I was deciding if a test was needed which carried its own risks
1 in 1000 chance of developing a certain disease in childhood - certain risk factors treble that chance so you now have a 3 in 1000 chance of developing that disease - still fractionally tiny and not in absolute terms a big increase but newspaper headlines will say 300% increased risk etc because people don’t process or understand statistical risk and newspapers don’t or won’t.
I think it was @Kinvara’s Passion on another thread who vouched for it, but i bought a litre of coconaut water yesterday and i just had two glasses there after a long run. It was lovely stuff, felt right drinking it. I’ll be getting more of it, expensive stuff though. 
its great stuff, price?
I live in England and can’t remember exact price but it was somewhere between £3.50 - £4, so yes very steep. That put it near €5 a litre in Ireland?
Where abouts mate?
Doncaster
Bloodstock business?